Jump to content

happy

Members
  • Content Count

    366
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About happy

  • Rank
    Tri-Centurion
  1. Robert Prechter: "This is it ... US stock averages should begin their biggest decline ever." - 19th September, 2014 note: this also coincides w/ Elliot Wave featuring a free Open Week - LINK
  2. What is Delusion ? Delusion refers to a strongly held belief despite evidence that the belief is false. Delusion usually occurs as a result of a neurological problem or a mental illness. However, delusion is not associated with any one disease in particular and has been found to manifest as a feature of various different physical and mental illnesses. Delusion is a typical clinical feature in psychotic disorders such as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and paraphrenia. According to the most recent version of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM IV), delusion is defined as: “A false belief based on incorrect inference about external reality that is firmly sustained despite what almost everyone else believes and despite what constitutes the inconvertible and obvious proof or evidence to the contrary.” - LINK Indicators of a delusion The following can indicate a delusion: 1. The patient expresses an idea or belief with unusual persistence or force. 2. That idea appears to have an undue influence on the patient's life, and the way of life is often altered to an inexplicable extent. 3. Despite his/her profound conviction, there is often a quality of secretiveness or suspicion when the patient is questioned about it. 4. The individual tends to be humorless and oversensitive, especially about the belief. 5. There is a quality of centrality: no matter how unlikely it is that these strange things are happening to him, the patient accepts them relatively unquestioningly. 6. An attempt to contradict the belief is likely to arouse an inappropriately strong emotional reaction, often with irritability and hostility. 7. The belief is, at the least, unlikely, and out of keeping with the patient's social, cultural and religious background. 8. The patient is emotionally over-invested in the idea and it overwhelms other elements of their psyche. 9. The delusion, if acted out, often leads to behaviors which are abnormal and/or out of character, although perhaps understandable in the light of the delusional beliefs. 10. Individuals who know the patient observe that the belief and behavior are uncharacteristic and alien. - LINK Causes of Delusion • Drug intoxication • Psychotic disorders • Depressive disorders • Dementia • Various others Delusion Development Several risk factors increase the risk of delusion developing and some of these include: • Middle or older age • Poor hearing or vision • Social isolation • Unfamiliar circumstances (such as experienced by immigrants) • Low socioeconomic status • Financial difficulties and loss of gainful employment • Paranoid, schizoid, or avoidant personality disorder As the person with schizophrenia goes throughout his or her daily life, situations and events will be encountered that are available for misinterpretation. Their significance can be extremely exaggerated, intentions and actions surrounding them misunderstood, and paranoia risen to unmanageable levels. … The problem with delusions is that they become very complex and are substantiated by what seems to be a legit web of supportive evidence. Any attempt to refute or dissuade the believer can land the healthy helper into a role in the sinister plot. The convictions are strong and can lead to desperate acts of behavior that can be dangerous. … Simple erroneous beliefs can start with a simple misperception of an event. The problem is, with schizophrenia delusions, the delusional disorder involved causes the individual to continue updating and reinforcing the delusion rather than dismiss it. Instead of assimilating the misperceived event into a category of thought that already exists, they continue to accommodate them, creating new realities and opening possibilities that are very improbable. The complexity climbs and the random, interconnected web of support for the belief begins to make more and more sense until it all finally “clicks.” Many of times these delusions arise due to an either extremely deflated or inflated self-esteem, and then persist on the basis of the paradoxical uncertainty and certainty of paranoia. They persist due to memory reconsolidation, the constant process of updating and revising the conspiracy to support it’s truths. They become so strong that they are impervious to ever being contradicted or proven wrong. - LINK
  3. Haha, ok ... now you makes me laugh.
  4. No, I don’t see you point. WIKI: circular reasoning
  5. I'm rubbishing your arguments? Where? I'm looking. I really don't know where your aggression is coming from. Your knee-jerk reaction is completely unwarranted. You're assuming things that are just not there. All the best.
  6. Seriously man. I giving you a lot of rope. Please give me the benefit of the doubt before jumping to conclusions!
  7. Why the passive aggression? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaxtKeWKPBs 3:16 - [quoting the 1952 report] "reports of incidents convince us that there is something going on that requires our immediate attention. Sightings of objects at great altitudes traveling at high speeds in the vicinity of major US defence installations are of such a nature that they are not attributable to natural phenomena or known types of aerial vehicles.” Interesting . . . however, this is then followed by pure conjecture, not evidence! 3:48 - “It’s the CIA. People don’t just come out and say, “Boss we’re being invaded”, but this is about as close as you’ll get in a classified memo to the director of the Central Intelligence Agency.” 5:30 - “That’s 1976, what can do that today, much less 35 years ago. Well officially speaking we don’t really know. Unofficially, I think we do know. These are advanced technology that are not being operated, officially at least, by our own civilization. And therein lies the problem with the UFO phenomenon. Everyone in the world something is going on, and no one in official power is ever willing to admit it. There are people that are so high-bound in their opinions and so skeptical about this without bothering to look at the evidence that they will say, “well the government did look into this the government did have the project blue book, they investigated it, they found there is really nothing to this, I heard there was a scientific investigation too that also debunked the UFOs” … They are called UFO's because they are un-identified. If you want to then explain what these un-identified flying objects might be, that's fine. But a story that describes what these objects might be does not therefore qualify as "the truth". 6:30 - “But here’s the deal, project blue book, a joke of an operation” 7:56 - “Look, I’ll tell you right now, those people didn’t do one investigation that was worth a damn” Obviously the investigation is not worth a damn, because it does not back up your preconceived ideas. There is very little substance in these claims. I have no problem with there being unexplained phenomena, it is interesting and fascinating ... but it is one thing to observe un-identified objects, and quite another to not only provide a possible explanation, but to assert this explanation as "the truth" ( which for some reason always seems to be mixed in with an apocalyptic and messianic zeal ).
  8. It is your forum: so it is ultimately up to you what you want to post on here. But the absolutist zeal and evangelising is unnecessary to my mind. I originally found this forum via Commodity Watch Radio and found a lot of interesting market related and geo-political discussions. But the hostility towards “unbelievers” and patent inability to engage in rational discussion is baffling.
  9. I think you completely misunderstand my posts. Before we start talking about empirical evidence, it is important to eliminate logical fallacies and irrelevant details that only serve to detract from the real issue. This is why I have been careful not to engage with the empirical details, because if you are unconcerned about circular reasoning, then you can have all the “evidence” in the world, but you are no longer engaging with the material rationally. So don’t confuse my not engaging with the empirical matter with my ignorance of the empirical matter. Frankly, your response is a worry: you thank me for taking the time to respond to your specific points, but then undercut this by suggesting if I were to just sit down and listen (instead of spending my time writing this reply) I’d understand. You can’t have it both ways. This, and the absolute distrust of government that is conveniently substituted with the absolute trust of “expert witnesses” has a very authoritarian flavour to it. It seems the only way one can meaningfully engage with this material is to submit and “see” the truth. This is not being open minded, this is being extremely close minded.
  10. 1. Mainstream History is wrong, and has not be re-written to bring in Gobekli Tepe, etc History is being re-written all the time. I don’t see this as being problem. It’s the very nature of the beast. I googled ‘Gobekli Tepe’ and found an interesting BBC documentary on YouTube HERE and HERE . I have a feeling that this “mainstream” you keep referring to is something of a straw man. Where is this mainstream history? Who is this mainstream historian. Historians disagree about all sorts of details. 2. Alien-looking hybrids have had their DNA analyzed and 9% is unknown and unexplained 9% is unknown and unexplained. Exactly! I don’t know how ‘unknown’ and ‘unexplained’ suddenly turns into evidence for ‘known’ and ‘explained’! I always thought the ‘U’ in UFO stands for un-identified. I find it a great irony that the so-called UFO-logy movement insists on “knowing” and having “identified” what their self-ascribed title insists is in fact unidentified! We are all born into a world that at first seems chaotic and bewildering. We slowly gain a grasp of our surroundings with the help of stories and eventually theories that help us make sense of the world around us. But this doesn’t mean there aren’t mysteries and anomalies. Indeed, if it wasn’t for mysteries, there wouldn’t be a need to explain anything. But an explanation is not automatically a theory, and a theory does not automatically constitute “the truth”. For this we need to adhere to some rational guidelines, which brings me to the next point. 3. Any physical evidence of UFO's and ET's is swept up and hidden by the govt (as at Roswell) This is a completely circular statement. There is a cover-up, hence, because the government has never revealed the cover-up, there must be a cover-up. How could one falsify your statement? Unless a conviction counts as evidence, you are guilty of presupposing what you should set out to prove. You are putting the cart before the horse, so to speak. See point 5 below. 4. The government has a patterned response of ridiculing and undermining those who attack their cover-up / People have had their careers ruined, been threatened and even killed when they try to get the truth out Sure, but ridicule is hardly a criterion for “the truth”. If anything, it confirms that this belief system is motivated by a powerful sense of ressentiment: If you haven’t been persecuted (or if you don’t perceive yourself to be persecuted) then you cannot be an apostle of the truth. Is persecution a necessary criterion for the truth? If not, then this is a completely irrelevant point. If so, why? 5. Governments constantly lie to us about everything important, so why would they tell us the Truth about ET's? Again, you are presupposing what you should set out to prove. ET’s exist, therefore, because the government lies about many things, it must lie about the existence of ET’s. The reasoning should read: If ET’s exist, then, insofar as the government lies about many things, it would seem likely that it also lies about ET’s. Notice however, when reformulated in this way, that the behaviour of government is completely irrelevant to your point. How the government behaves in no way impacts on the hypothesis that ET’s exist! It amounts to a proverbial red herring. 6. Several points of UFO/ET evidence have been presented and summarized in Rich Dolan's 10-minute video Ok, fair enough. I will try and watch the video later, but I hope you appreciate that given the above 5 points I am not holding my breath. This whole belief system is based on a naive conception of “the truth” as a bunch of self-evident facts that furthermore lie obscured in some hidden away corner. Facts always presuppose a horizon of disclosure - a hypothesis - but a hypothesis cannot itself be a fact. Facts might support the hypothesis, there might be nothing that contradicts the hypothesis, but this does not therefore make the hypothesis unconditionally true. You seem to repeatedly conflate the hypothesis for a fact and conflate the strength of conviction with “the truth.”
  11. Note: I was merely linking an article from Reuters - LINK But Scotland is certainly a canary in the independence coal mine ... and is already having huge implications in other parts of the World (but I'm thinking in particular of Catalonia, which plans to holds its "illegal" referendum on the 9th of November).
  12. Why Scotland looks like the canary in the independence coal mine Scotland’s drive to independence has been interpreted by many as a throwback to ancient identity politics – but many of the trends on display in the Scottish referendum have more to do with the politics of the future than those of the past. The polls show that this week’s vote is too close to call. There is still a chance that the “No” campaign will ultimately prevail – something that I dearly hope will happen both for the sake of the Scots and the rest of the Britain. But whatever the result of the vote, I think we must recognize that the “Yes” campaign has done more to shape the agenda of Scottish politics. And it is the forces it tapped into that will also change politics around the world. So far, the commentary has focused on whether a Yes vote in Scotland will have resonance among other minorities in search of statehood – from Catalonia and Flanders to Taiwan and Quebec. But the truth is that the political trends in Scotland are also reshaping many nations that do not face imminent break-up – from America to Zambia. I would point to four trends in particular: 1. Self-government will increasingly trump economics 2. Nationalism will increasingly clad itself in progressive clothing 3. Elites are not as persuasive as they used to be 4. The idea of “One Nation” is dead - LINK
  13. happy

    To Serve Man (Twilight Zone)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAucs8K5E0U
  14. I was trying to make a general observation. But yes, at the end of the day it all boils down to trust. However, simply because one distrusts the "official story" does not therefore prove a conspiracy. One can also conclude that the official story does not add up. Socrates often remarked that the only thing he knew was that he did not know anything. Of course, one might be frustrated with such a conclusion and feel compelled to propose an alternative story ... but this does not automatically follow, nor does it guarantee "the truth" of the alternative story. All stories need authors and as such rest on authority, credibility, and ultimately trust.
  15. • Key hits back at spy-law claim • John Key 'comfortable' that NSA is not spying on NZ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yATD1_Cg7kg&list=UUG0xyRVgb5Yf1lvQxkRrYYQ NZ Herald columnists: • Fran O'Sullivan: Key wins - now let's focus on real issues • John Armstrong: Moment of 'struth' sees Dotcom bubble burst
×